New Data on Political Interest and Participation of the Young People (16-18 y. old) in Liège, Belgium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1990, one of us administered a questionnaire to 640 students from nine high schools in Liège (Belgium) and its suburb. The survey aimed at measuring the political interest of the youth and their level of participation in a wide range of associations. The questionnaire, which was also administered in Quebec and Paris, was made of 200 other indicators (confidence toward the institutions, impact of the political decisions, role of the state, etc.). Last spring, we administered a similar questionnaire to the same schools in order to compare the data gathered in our previous researches and the new data. The comparison will engage the oft-asked questions in the field about political participation—or its decline—amongst the youth. The new data show, as in 1990, that approximately two-thirds of the students (16-18 years old) participate in associational life in a broad sense. Political participation sensu stricto is still less popular than participation in organisations campaigning for the defence of human rights or the environment. We also observe significant differences in the traditional sociological categories. Yet, as we did for the 1990 data, we shall move our analysis beyond the usual sociological categories in order to stress the internal differences between groups. As such, we shall privilege the analysis in terms of classifications. With a more precise image of the various forms of participation as well as the attitudes related to it, different patterns will characterise young people’s participation. Accordingly, our understanding of the political socialisation’s mechanisms will be adapted. Such an inquiry seems necessary in order to engage the traditional views on political participation and interest of today’s youth.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".